Comments about ‘Romney and Obama focus on debate preparations’

It is difficult to believe two people who talk about war and peace who have no
skin in the game. Neither Romney nor Ryan have been in military service. One
might argue that same about Obama and Biden, but Joe Biden's son served in
Iraq. That gives them credibility when it comes to making decision about
sending young men and women off to war.

Mitt Romney was a major
supporter of the Vietnam War. But he didn't volunteer to go off to
Southeast Asia and do his duty. He protested against those who protested the
war, but he took his student deferments, went off to France on a LDS Mission
with a religious deferment, and took more student deferments upon his return.
Then he got a high number which kept him out of the military draft altogeter.

Others went, but he stayed home and cheered them on. Similarly, Paul
Ryan could have gone when Bush I went to war in 1991 (he was 21 and the military
was voluntary) but he had other priorities like and earlier VP nominee. Serving
the nation in the military, obviously, was not an interest yet they want to make
decisions using it.

I find it odd that the Romney camp and the media continue to let so many lies go
by. For instance, it is constantly being parroted that Romney will lower taxes
for the rich. His plan calls for closing loop-holes for the rich and not
lowering their taxes. Obama's plan is to lower taxes for the rich.

Another example is that Romney called for the auto-industry to go through a
restructuring bankruptcy 4 years ago. Obama gave them a huge bail-out that
didn't work so they finally did what Romney had suggested in the first
place and the bail-out was never paid back. It is pretty simple so why is it
never straightened out? Romney tried a few times but the media never gets it
right so maybe he gave up.

I am proud of the American people. They
are seeing through the lies or omissions of the press and it looks like Romney
will win anyway.

If Obama is re-elected (even if only by a
small margin), would you accept that as final? If Congress refuses to overturn
Obamacare, would you accept that?

Or will you refuse to accept the
result and continue to claim that there was a violation of of the people
"real" concerns, Obama is illegitimate and Obamacare is a fraud?

We know where people who will consider Obama illegitimate regardless of
the election. They want their way and none other. They hide behind the
prejudices as giving them supreme authority to decide what is right and what is
not. They make the statement that there is only black and white and they tell
you directly which is which.

Instead of repeating conservative
talking points ad nauseum, think about what you are saying. What deductions?
The "media" includes the extensive Right Wing media. The automobile
industry bailout was a success. The stimulus kept us from going over the cliff.
Romney's economic proposals are like trickle-down economics, fuzzy and
misleading.

There are legitimate conservative issues which are not
being discussed. However, partisanship blinds us if carried to extremes.
Ideologues only see extremity.

To "SammyB" you, like so many of your ilk cannot understand that if you
close or reduce the number of deductions a wealthy person can take, they will
end up paying more in taxes, so to offset the increase in taxes, their rates
would be lowered. There is an article at Reason where they use IRS data to show
that before the Bush tax cuts the wealthy paid 37% of all income taxes, then
after the tax cuts were enacted, they paid 38%. There, using numbers from the
IRS, they show that thanks to the Bush tax cuts, the wealthy paid more.

To "Mad Hatter" just take a look at Obama's record when he has
sent troops out there, and see how well he has done with their lives. In
Afghanistan between 2001 and 2009, there were about 600 deaths in Afghanistan.
Since 2009 there has been around 1400 deaths. Does Obama understand the
military? I don't think so. Now Romney shows that he understands the
military. He knew that in Vietnam the troops needed to be given bullets and be
allowed to shoot.

With the stimulus package of
a few years ago, Obama has indeed created thousands of jobs, and helped build
the economy. Here's how:

* With billions of American tax money,
China and Japan produced electric producing windmills.* Stimulus money
sent an Australia company, allowed them to build a windmill farm in Texas.* Money sent to Finland and Mexico, allowed the building of auto plants and
employment in the area.* Billions sent to Brazil, allowed for the building
of off shore drilling and employment for the local citizens.

Huh? All hat and not cattle.
"Understands"? Based on what? Vietnam was a debacle. Mitt's
father finally came to understand that. Perhaps Mitt also came to understand
that. But talking up more war is not understanding the military. Putting the
lives of young Americans in harms way takes more that what current conservative
policy of talking tough suggests.

So what is Romney's plan?
Send troops back into Iraq? Keep troops fighting in Afganistan as allies
depart? Put boots on the ground in Syria? Bomb Iran? Tell me. What is his
plan?

The perception that America is weak in the eyes of the world is
a Republican untruth. The idea that American needs to project its military
power throughout the Middle East is a ludicrous. It only puts on display the
conservative candidate's lack of knowledge of world affairs and history.

If I was still in the Air Force or Army and after the debacle of the past month
from the Libyan execution of the United States of America Ambassador and other
civilian servants of our country and the lack of integrity in that issue, I
would not trust this President in anything. That is the bottom line of a
Commander-in-Chief type of operation, are our United States of America
diplomatic and military personnel safe as required by DoD and State Department
Regulations and standards? Did the Ambassador and his personnel request
additional help to protect them?

We only spent $70,000 in Pakistan
telling those people that it was the June video that caused the riots and
stirred up the people in a riot, on 9/11/12. The weapons the real perpetrators
used were military and precise heavy type weapons, right on target. Riots would
not have been precise, they would not have had the availability of those
weapons. People that riot could not be trusted with that kind of operation.

Libya's leaders even said it wasn't a riot but a precise
operation. We cannot trust this administration with a debate of Biden or Obama.

Even though Mrs. Clinton is not in the debate, she was told exactly what to say
about the death of her Ambassador representing the United States in basically a
war zone without that type of protection.

To state that it was a
video that had been out 2 to 3 months before the incident and specificity about
that video is a shame for our diplomatic corps around the world. What does that
mean about their security in any other country where the defense is not good for
our people?

Mrs. Clinton's husband may have had a problem with
the definition of "is" but he didn't kill anyone with that useage.
However, the Secretary of State is responsible for her personnel.

When VP Biden said he didn't know about any requests from the Embassy to
the Department of State or higher for security in his debate was probably not
the truth. In a month there has been so much controversy about those executions
in Libya that there is no way he could state that he didn't know about the
requests. VP becomes President if Obama was reelected and anything happened to
him. We can't take chances.

The good news for liberals is that Obama will do better in this debate than
during the first one. He certainly couldn't do any worse. After the
elections are over it will be said the the presidential debate in Denver cost
Obama the presidency.

They are still trying to decide whether it was
Denver's high elevation or valium that did him in